Posted By DP Opinion On September 26, 2012 @ 3:29 pm In Uncategorized | No Comments

By Alexander MallerGuest commentary

The old CU medical campus is located in the heart of a distinct neighborhood whose borders are Colorado Boulevard, 12th Avenue, Holly Street, and 8th Avenue. This neighborhood is distinguished by its mixed-use, high density, high-rise urban character. [1]

We are neither suburban, nor “new-urban,” we are urban and we like it. We are the thousands of residents, workers and visitors that live and work in the area, a highly diverse population of mixed incomes and ages, with a wide range of cultural backgrounds: hospital workers, students and patients, existing and new seniors, working or retired people, customers of cafes, of tailor shops and barber shops, visitors to the existing businesses and institutions, and many more. We are a distinct Town within Denver’s urban fabric.

The existing campus must be redeveloped. The redevelopment of the campus will serve as a catalyst for sustaining and enhancing the living conditions of our neighborhood.

We residents of the neighborhood need more affordable and sustainable services and amenities. We are aware that sustainable development requires a strong anchor. Wal-Mart is the only retailer of scale that has the means and the will to take the risk and experiment in our local urban conditions. Its declared intent is to put in place a new urban version of retail, some call it “a Macy’s with Wal-Mart prices.” We welcome Wal-Mart and expect good cooperation with its management. It is the kind of anchor that can attract new residents, businesses and entertainment, and revitalize the neighborhood, raise real-estate values in the area and bring much needed revenues to the city.

We should view the proposed plan as the first step in the promotion of the area. The move in 2014 of the Veteran Hospital to Auraria will require further development along 9th Avenue. In this regard imagine 9th Avenue as the central axis of the neighborhood: a predominantly pedestrian street, unobstructed by crossing traffic, a linear park, with integrated parking (“traffic calming“ design), and safe and convenient access to all uses in the area; a meeting place with street events in appropriate locations rather than improvisations in parking lots. This green axis can replace the wasteful and ineffective ”college greens”, so decorative on paper, but useless in hot summers or freezing winters.

Perhaps the emerging architecture will reflect on the existing modern architecture of the area. Perhaps we can dispense of the sterile, inclined and fragmented walls and the incoherent cacophony of colors and materials found in some of the recent commercial schemes on South Colorado Boulevard. Perhaps if we want to create user friendly urban places, we want to be embraced by urban spaces with human scale, with arcades and canopies, and an accommodating landscape. Perhaps we should preserve all existing parking garages, a very valuable asset, and maybe more of the existing buildings can be remodeled and adjusted to fit new uses. Maybe Larimer Square and Larimer Street can serve as inspiration rather than South Colorado Boulevard.

The current catalyst may further inspire a unique urban and architectural design; a design that incorporates new construction with preservation, pedestrian priorities and affordable services, mixed uses and diverse populations. The highly urban character of the area can offer intriguing opportunities for future exciting initiatives and urban experiences.

I call upon city authorities to show courage, vision and flexibility in supporting and expediting the redevelopment of the area, in the spirit advocated by Denver’s New Master Plan. Let us not forgo this opportunity.

Another urgent reason to redevelop the area is the inability of CU to maintain the property indefinitely even though opponents attest that it can and should do so. We must ask why should CU, after being forced out by the neighborhoods, waste $750000 per year from its limited public resources to maintain a wasteland, instead of investing in academic projects. In the event that maintenance deteriorates and blight increases everybody will be faced with a dangerous urban and social condition.

Some people justify their opposition to Wal-Mart by expressing fear that it will attract “undesirable” customers. Let me warn these opponents that the “undesirable “customers are already here: the “undesirables” are us the residents, workers and visitors in the immediately adjacent area. And we are not going anywhere. And, by the way, no one forces anyone to shop at Wal-Mart. It appears to me that the outcry against Wal-Mart is just a pretext to stop development.

We want to remind all opponents, living close and far, that we live in the immediate area and we regard their unwarranted intervention as an unacceptable intrusion in our lives. We are prepared to have a civilized dialogue but require and deserve respect for our life style and opinions as we respect theirs.

Alexander Maller is a resident and a director of the HOA of Park Mayfair condominium with 270 apartments. He is a retired professor of architecture and urban design.